An
interim report from the United States Commission on Civil Rights blasts
Attorney General Eric Holder and the U.S. Justice Department for stonewalling
an investigation into the DOJ's handling of a civil rights case involving
the New Black
Panthers and allegations of voter intimidation.

The U.S.
Commission on Civil Rights on Friday released its report on the
Justice Department's commitment to even-handed enforcement of the civil
rights laws entitled "Race Neutral Enforcement of the Law? DOJ
and the New Black Panther Party Litigation: An Interim Report."
The news media's silence on the report is deafening and deserving of
a separate investigation, according to enforcement officials.

The
Commission on Civil Rights investigated an incident that occurred in
Philadelphia during the 2008 presidential election in which two New
Black Panther Party members stood at the entrance to a polling place
in full paramilitary garb shouting racial slurs, one of them brandishing
a police baton commonly known as a nightstick.

In
January 2009, a civil suit was initiated against the Black Panthers,
its chairman, and the two men at the polling place for alleged Voting
Rights Act violations. Despite the entry of a default in DOJ's favor,
in May 2009 the Department abruptly reversed course and dismissed charges
against all but one of the defendants, and reduced the original sanctions
it requested against the remaining defendant.

The
Commission issued subpoenas for documents and for the testimony of key
DOJ witnesses, including those supervisors allegedly responsible for
the change in course of the lawsuit. The Department, however, refused
to allow anyone with firsthand knowledge of the lawsuit to testify before
the Commission and failed to provide critical documents relating to
the Department's decision-making process.

In
addition, public-interest group Judicial
Watch filed its original Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request
on May 29, 2009. The Justice Department acknowledged receiving the request
on June 18, 2009, but then referred the request to the Office of Information
Policy (OIP) and the Civil Rights Division. On January 15, 2010, the
OIP notified Judicial Watch that it would be responding to the request
on behalf of the Offices of the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney
General, Associate Attorney General, Public Affairs, Legislative Affairs,
Legal Policy, and Intergovernmental and Public Liaison.

Advertisement

Judicial
Watch filed its initial lawsuit because of the agency's failure to respond.
The DOJ's September 15, 2010, Vaughn index revealed that the
two top political appointees at the DOJ were involved in the decision
to dismiss the case, which contradicts sworn testimony by Thomas Perez,
Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, who testified
before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that no political leadership
was involved in the decision.

The
Vaughn index produced by the DOJ describes documents that are
currently being withheld in their entirety. The index details a series
of internal DOJ emails regarding the Black Panther case between the
highest political appointees inside Justice, including former Deputy
Attorney General David Ogden and the Associate Attorney General Thomas
Perrelli.

The
Justice Department's
efforts to stonewall the Civil Rights Commission's investigation were
largely successful until two career staff attorneys testified before
the Commission in defiance of the Department's ban, at great professional
risk to themselves.

These
individuals, Christopher Coates and J. Christian Adams, both testified
that the Department's reversal of the New Black Panther Party litigation
reflected a culture within the Justice Department that believes voting
rights laws should not be enforced in a race-neutral fashion. Both witnesses
testified that some DOJ personnel refused to work on voting cases in
which the defendant was black and the victim white, and that those who
worked on such cases suffered harassment within the Department.

Mr.
Coates further testified that current political appointees have openly
stated their opposition to race-neutral enforcement of voting rights
laws, testimony that remains unchallenged by the Department.

Although
such testimony supported the need for thorough investigation, DOJ continued
to withhold relevant documents and preclude relevant officials and supervisors
from testifying. The Commission was thus limited in its ability to complete
a final report.

As
a result, the Commission issued only an interim report on Friday that
describes the evidence that has been collected up to this point and
the lack of cooperation by the Department of Justice.

Although
the Commission has the power to subpoena witnesses and written material
and requires federal agencies to cooperate fully with its investigations,
its authority to seek legal recourse when the Attorney General refuses
to enforce Commission subpoenas, as has occurred repeatedly during this
investigation, is unclear. The report notes that the Department has
an inherent conflict of interest when it decides not to cooperate with
the Commission's investigations of DOJ's actions.

The
Commission recommends, therefore, that Congress consider amendments
to the Commission's statute to address investigations in which the Attorney
General and/or the Department of Justice have a conflict of interest
arising from the Commission's requests for information.

Subscribe
to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter
Your E-Mail Address:

Options
might include requiring that the Attorney
General respond in writing whenever the Commission requests the
appointment of a special counsel to represent it in court; a statutory
provision clarifying that the Commission may hire its own counsel and
proceed independently in federal court; or a conscious decision by Congress
not to alter the current authority that allows the Attorney General
and the Department of Justice to act against the Commission's interest
without explanation.

The
report was approved by a 5-2 vote. Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners
Gaziano, Heriot, Kirsanow and Taylor voted in favor; Commissioners Melendez
and Yaki voted against; Vice Chair Thernstrom was not present for the
vote.